DTC Engineers & Constructors awarded $22.1M for building renovation, highlighting strong competition and fixed-price terms

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $22,134,525 ($22.1M)

Contractor: DTC Engineers & Constructors, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2009-09-03

End Date: 2011-04-25

Contract Duration: 599 days

Daily Burn Rate: $37.0K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: BASE BID RENOVATE BUILDING 9

Place of Performance

Location: PHILADELPHIA, PHILADELPHIA County, PENNSYLVANIA, 19111

State: Pennsylvania Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $22.1 million to DTC ENGINEERS & CONSTRUCTORS, LLC for work described as: BASE BID RENOVATE BUILDING 9 Key points: 1. The contract utilized a firm-fixed-price structure, aiming to control costs and provide predictability. 2. Full and open competition suggests a robust bidding process, potentially leading to better pricing. 3. The duration of 599 days indicates a significant renovation project requiring substantial planning and execution. 4. The award was a delivery order under a larger contract, suggesting a phased approach to procurement. 5. The project is categorized under Commercial and Institutional Building Construction, a common sector for federal spending. 6. The base bid amount of $22.1M provides a clear benchmark for the renovation's initial estimated cost.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract's firm-fixed-price nature is a positive indicator for cost control. Benchmarking against similar building renovations by the Department of the Navy would provide further insight into whether the $22.1 million price represents good value. The number of bids received (3) is moderate, and further analysis would be needed to determine if this level of competition adequately drove down costs compared to market rates for similar construction services.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, meaning all responsible sources were permitted to submit a bid. Three bids were received, indicating a reasonable level of interest and competition for this project. While three bidders suggest some level of price discovery, a higher number of bidders typically correlates with more aggressive pricing and a greater likelihood of securing the best value for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: The full and open competition process, with three bidders, likely resulted in a more competitive price for taxpayers compared to a sole-source or limited competition award. This process helps ensure that taxpayer funds are used efficiently by encouraging contractors to offer their best pricing.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of the Navy, which will receive a renovated building to support its operations. The services delivered include the renovation of Building 9, enhancing its functionality and potentially its lifespan. The geographic impact is localized to the facility where Building 9 is located, likely within Pennsylvania given the 'SN' field. The project will likely involve a workforce of construction professionals, tradespeople, and project managers, contributing to employment in the construction sector.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if the fixed-price contract does not adequately account for unforeseen construction challenges.
The moderate number of bidders (3) might indicate less intense competition than ideal, potentially impacting the final price.
The long project duration (599 days) increases the risk of market fluctuations affecting material costs or labor availability.

Positive Signals

The firm-fixed-price contract structure provides cost certainty for the government.
Awarding under full and open competition suggests a transparent and fair procurement process.
The base bid amount provides a clear initial financial baseline for the project.

Sector Analysis

The Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector is a significant area of federal spending, encompassing a wide range of projects from office renovations to new facility construction. Federal agencies frequently contract for these services to maintain and upgrade their infrastructure. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing the cost per square foot or cost per project for similar renovation projects undertaken by other government entities or within the private sector in the same geographic region.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not specifically set aside for small businesses (SS: false, SB: false). Therefore, the primary contractor, DTC Engineers & Constructors, LLC, is likely a larger entity. There is no explicit information on subcontracting plans for small businesses within this data snippet. The impact on the small business ecosystem would depend on whether the prime contractor actively seeks to subcontract portions of the work to small businesses, which is not detailed here.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the relevant program officials within the Department of the Navy. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm-fixed-price contract, which obligates the contractor to complete the work for the agreed-upon price. Transparency is facilitated by the public nature of federal contract awards, allowing for review of basic contract details. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Facilities Maintenance
Naval Facilities Engineering Command Contracts
Federal Building Construction Projects
Commercial Building Renovation Contracts

Risk Flags

Moderate number of bidders may limit optimal price competition.
Long project duration increases risk of cost escalation and unforeseen issues.
Fixed-price contract requires careful monitoring for scope creep and quality assurance.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $22.1 million to DTC ENGINEERS & CONSTRUCTORS, LLC. BASE BID RENOVATE BUILDING 9

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is DTC ENGINEERS & CONSTRUCTORS, LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Navy).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $22.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2009-09-03. End: 2011-04-25.

What is the track record of DTC Engineers & Constructors, LLC with federal contracts, particularly within the Department of Defense?

A comprehensive review of DTC Engineers & Constructors, LLC's federal contract history would involve analyzing databases like the Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS) or USAspending.org. This would reveal the total value of contracts awarded to the company, the agencies they have served, and the types of services provided. For this specific contract, understanding their past performance on similar building renovation projects, adherence to schedules, and cost control would be crucial. A history of successful, on-time, and within-budget completions would indicate a lower risk profile for this $22.1 million project. Conversely, a pattern of disputes, delays, or cost overruns on previous DoD contracts might raise concerns about their capacity to execute this particular renovation effectively.

How does the $22.1 million base bid compare to the average cost of similar building renovations by the Department of the Navy?

To benchmark the $22.1 million base bid, one would need to analyze historical data for similar building renovation projects undertaken by the Department of the Navy. Key comparison metrics would include the size of the building (square footage), the scope of work (e.g., structural, electrical, HVAC upgrades), and the geographic location. For instance, if similar renovations of comparable-sized buildings in the same region have averaged between $15 million and $20 million, then $22.1 million might be considered at the higher end, warranting closer scrutiny of the project's specific requirements or the contractor's pricing. Conversely, if similar projects have ranged from $20 million to $25 million, this bid would appear more aligned with market expectations. The firm-fixed-price nature suggests the contractor has factored in potential risks, but understanding the baseline cost is essential for value assessment.

What are the primary risks associated with a 599-day firm-fixed-price contract for building renovation?

A 599-day firm-fixed-price contract for building renovation carries several inherent risks. For the government, the primary risk is that the fixed price may not adequately account for unforeseen conditions discovered during construction (e.g., hazardous materials, structural issues not apparent in initial surveys), potentially leading to change orders that increase the total cost. There's also a risk that the contractor might cut corners on quality to maintain profitability within the fixed price, although quality assurance measures should mitigate this. For the contractor, the risk lies in underestimating the project's complexity, labor costs, or material price escalation over the extended duration, potentially leading to financial losses. The long duration itself increases exposure to market volatility in material prices and labor availability.

What does the 'PA' status code signify in the context of this contract award?

The 'PA' status code, often found in federal procurement data, typically signifies 'Procurement Automated' or a similar designation related to the automated processing of the contract action. It indicates that the award and its associated data were processed through an electronic system. This is a procedural code related to how the contract was recorded and managed within the government's financial and procurement systems, rather than a substantive descriptor of the contract's nature, performance, or risk. It suggests the award followed standard electronic procedures for federal contracting.

How does the number of bidders (3) impact price discovery and potential value for taxpayers in this full and open competition?

In a full and open competition, the number of bidders directly influences price discovery and the potential value realized by taxpayers. With three bidders, there is a degree of competition, forcing each contractor to submit a price they believe is both competitive and profitable. This is generally better than a sole-source or limited competition scenario. However, a higher number of bidders, such as five or more, typically intensifies competition further. More bidders mean a greater likelihood that at least one contractor will offer a significantly lower price to secure the contract, or that the existing bidders will sharpen their pencils to remain competitive. Therefore, while three bidders provide some price discovery, it might not represent the optimal level of competition for maximizing taxpayer value compared to scenarios with more robust bidding.

What is the significance of this contract being a 'Delivery Order' (aw: DELIVERY ORDER)?

The designation 'Delivery Order' indicates that this contract is not a standalone award but rather a specific order placed against a previously established indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contract or a similar type of basic ordering agreement. This means that DTC Engineers & Constructors, LLC likely holds a larger, overarching contract with the Department of the Navy that allows for multiple task orders or delivery orders to be issued over a period. This approach is often used for services or supplies that are needed periodically or in varying quantities. For this specific renovation, it implies that the $22.1 million is the value of one specific task within a broader contractual framework, potentially allowing for flexibility in project scope or timing across multiple orders.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Construction › Nonresidential Building Construction › Commercial and Institutional Building Construction

Product/Service Code: ARCHITECT/ENGINEER SERVICES › ARCH-ENG SVCS - CONSTRUCTION

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Solicitation ID: N4008508R2108

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 556 WASHINGTON AVE, NORTH HAVEN, CT, 06473

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Limited Liability Corporation, Minority Owned Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Indian (Subcontinent) American Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $22,134,525

Exercised Options: $22,134,525

Current Obligation: $22,134,525

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: N4008508D2108

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline